CVE-2025-46871
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier are affected by a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be abused by a low privileged attacker to inject malicious scripts into vulnerable form fields. Malicious JavaScript may be executed in a victim’s browser when they browse to the page containing the vulnerable field.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceAdobe Experience Manager versions 6.5.22 and earlier contain a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in form fields. A low-privileged attacker can inject malicious JavaScript that persists in the system and executes in victim users' browsers when they view pages containing the compromised fields.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 6.5.23.0< 2025.5.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed AEM versionAccess the AEM System Information console at /system/console/status-html or run the version check via the AEM SDK or web console to retrieve the exact build numberAffected if The installed version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 (for cloud/early release versions)
-
Identify form field usageReview the AEM Forms implementation and locate all custom or out-of-the-box form components that accept user input and store data in the repositoryAffected if Any form fields exist that accept and store user-submitted content without known input validation
-
Inspect form data in repositoryQuery the JCR (Java Content Repository) using tools like CRXDE Lite or the Query Builder to examine stored values in form field nodes under /content or /appsAffected if Form field data contains unsanitized HTML script tags, JavaScript event handlers, or suspicious encoded payloads
-
Review recent content modificationsCheck AEM audit logs or version history for recent changes to form-related content nodes, looking for unexpected or unauthorized entries from low-privilege accountsAffected if Form content was recently modified by a low-privileged user with no legitimate business need to edit those fields
-
Scan for XSS payloads in stored contentUse AEM's search functionality or a repository query to scan for common XSS patterns such as <script>, javascript:, onload=, onerror=, and other event handlers in form-stored dataAffected if Any stored form data contains script tags or JavaScript event handler attributes
You are affected if your AEM version is below 6.5.23.0 or below 2025.5.0 AND your forms store user input that could contain malicious scripts without validation.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.5.23.02025.5.0
Apply the vendor patch (upgrade to AEM 6.5.23 or later) and implement input validation and output encoding for all form fields to prevent XSS. Consider Content Security Policy headers as defense-in-depth.
Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 or 2025.5.0 (or later)
- Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Back up the current AEM instance including content repository, configurations, and any custom code
- Download Adobe Experience Manager 6.5.23.0 (for 6.5.x branches) or 2025.5.0 (for cloud releases) from Adobe's official distribution site
- Follow Adobe's official upgrade documentation to install the new version on a staging environment first
- Validate the upgrade by testing form fields that were potentially vulnerable to XSS
- Deploy the upgraded version to production after successful validation
- Verify critical business workflows function correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-46871 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-46871 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data